by PJ Gaenir

The E-Mail Basket

Since my responses to email in this field aren't all that often, and since sometimes I don't respond merely because I've already said the same thing before, I thought maybe I should put some of my email responses online. Which reminds me that I actually have a "PJ's Archives" section that could do just that. But, I'd rather put it in the commentary section here since it's the only thing on the website that changes. This may be about RV, or may be about something else. Just misc. responses to email I get. I won't print the emails (or more than pieces) from the authors since I don't have permission for that.

Date, topic(s) discussed, content.

#1 - 15Jun99 - Art Bell and RV.

Hi Del,

I've been too out of touch to even know about the DJOvs.AB thing. I do know that I'd heard DJO had gotten some 'results' with his 'tech' that undermined some (at least one) of Art's favorite guests, so could that be behind it? I don't know.

Re: Art Bell, he is pretty much a nightmare for the entire field of psychic work, either science like anomalous cognition/remote viewing, or layman's versions like CRV/TRV/whatever.

It reminds me of a show I saw a long time ago, a supposed documentary about UFOlogy. The disbelievers were people like Dr. Michael Persinger, shown with a string of letters after their name, using a little plastic model of the brain to explain how people might just hallucinate it all. The epitome of believable. The 'believers' in UFOs were, for example, some very weird preacher in the desert who has shrines to aliens (and probably a congregation consisting of his dog), and he is shone in full regalia, lighted candles and all. Now, do you think the show that featured this was REALLY trying to be objective? When there are plenty of even published persons who are highly respected in the field, for example Dr. Jacque Vallee, who could have been used on the positive side of the experience of 'contact' having some legitimacy? Hardly. They can say all day, 'Well we promoted both sides fairly!' but in reality, any thinking human has the right to say, "If you feature idiots, you are not helping the subject, so don't pretend you're being objective."

Well, Art Bell is in the same situation as media presenting the topic, except in the above case it was almost certainly a matter of belief-bias; the promoter of the documentary (NOVA) either (a) would not have promoted it if it had made a real case for the topic, or (b) would not be able to make a documentary with that angle, at that time, without obliterating their own reputation in the science field. In Art Bell's case concerning remote viewing, and an even more unfair presentation of it, I am hard pressed to explain it, except to recall that saying about government, something along the lines of, 'don't attribute to organized intent what can be explained by sheer incompetence,' which if I'm merciful I might say could be the case.

I used to be a fan of Art. I thought he was intelligent and interesting. I am not anymore and it's about 99% thanks to his apparently cult-hero-worship of Ed Dames. Since I have knowledge in this area, and I see how massively misleading everything he's presenting is, it in turn makes me question other areas I am not at all expert in, that prior to now I actually thought might have some validity. Now I wonder if most of the people on Art's show are flamboyant bogus imposters, if Art is happily promoting the disinfo artists of the world 'cause they promise to be wild enough to make him a buck. It's sprinkled with some real folks now and then just to keep it confusing -- and perhaps, in the end, because it discredits people to go on Art's show, where they are then lumped in with the many lunatics like Dames that he promotes so often. Since media is so hard to come by, people in 'fringe' fields are glad of a chance to get their word out; even moreso if a show with the public audience of someone like Art Bell is behind it; it's a real tragedy that doing so, their one chance at exposure, can also be the death-knell for their ever being taken seriously.

If I didn't see it before, perhaps that's just because it wasn't until remote viewing went on Art's show that a topic I really knew something about was at issue. Now I consider the entire show so filled with disinformation that gleaning the small pearls from the thundering herds of swine he features is darn near impossible.

Well, you asked. That's what I think. :-) Thanks for writing Del.


Science Horizon Web Media

All logos and original content Copyright © 1996-2001 to Palyne "PJ" Gaenir. All rights reserved.